1. Neuroscience
Download icon

Overriding FUS autoregulation in mice triggers gain-of-toxic dysfunctions in RNA metabolism and autophagy-lysosome axis

Research Article
  • Cited 21
  • Views 2,590
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2019;8:e40811 doi: 10.7554/eLife.40811

Abstract

Mutations in coding and non-coding regions of FUS cause amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The latter mutations may exert toxicity by increasing FUS accumulation. We show here that broad expression within the nervous system of wild-type or either of two ALS-linked mutants of human FUS in mice produces progressive motor phenotypes accompanied by characteristic ALS-like pathology. FUS levels are autoregulated by a mechanism in which human FUS downregulates endogenous FUS at mRNA and protein levels. Increasing wild-type human FUS expression achieved by saturating this autoregulatory mechanism produces a rapidly progressive phenotype and dose-dependent lethality. Transcriptome analysis reveals mis-regulation of genes that are largely not observed upon FUS reduction. Likely mechanisms for FUS neurotoxicity include autophagy inhibition and defective RNA metabolism. Thus, our results reveal that overriding FUS autoregulation will trigger gain-of-function toxicity via altered autophagy-lysosome pathway and RNA metabolism function, highlighting a role for protein and RNA dyshomeostasis in FUS-mediated toxicity.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Shuo-Chien Ling

    Department of Physiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    For correspondence
    shuochien@gmail.com
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0300-8812
  2. Somasish Ghosh Dastidar

    Neurology, Duke University, Durham, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Seiya Tokunaga

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Wan Yun Ho

    Department of Physiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Kenneth Lim

    Department of Physiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Hristelina Ilieva

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Philippe A Parone

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  8. Sheue-Houy Tyan

    Department of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Tsemay M Tse

    Department of Physiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Jer-Cherng Chang

    Department of Physiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  11. Oleksandr Platoshyn

    Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  12. Ngoc B Bui

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  13. Anh Bui

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  14. Anne Vetto

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  15. Shuying Sun

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  16. Melissa McAlonis-Downes

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  17. Joo Seok Han

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  18. Debbie Swing

    Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  19. Katannya Kapeli

    Department of Physiology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  20. Gene W Yeo

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Stem Cell Program, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  21. Lino Tessarollo

    Mouse Cancer Genetics Program, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6420-772X
  22. Martin Marsala

    Department of Anesthesiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  23. Christopher E Shaw

    Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  24. Greg Tucker-Kellogg

    Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  25. Albert R La Spada

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6151-2964
  26. Clotilde Lagier-Tourenne

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  27. Sandrine Da Cruz

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  28. Don W Cleveland

    Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    For correspondence
    dcleveland@ucsd.edu
    Competing interests
    Don W Cleveland, Reviewing editor, eLife.

Funding

National Medical Research Council (NMRC/OFIRG/0001/2016)

  • Shuo-Chien Ling

Ministry of Education - Singapore (MOE2016-T2-1-024)

  • Shuo-Chien Ling

National Institutes of Health (R01 AG033082)

  • Albert R La Spada

Wellcome

  • Christopher E Shaw

National Institutes of Health (R01 NS041648)

  • Albert R La Spada

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All studies were carried out under protocols approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and the National University of Singapore (NUS), and were in compliance with Association for Assessment of Laboratory Animal Care guidelines for animal use. All studies were performed in such a manner as to minimize group size and animal suffering. The approved NUS protocol numbers are BR17-0928 and R16-0954.

Reviewing Editor

  1. J Paul Taylor, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: August 5, 2018
  2. Accepted: February 11, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 12, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: February 25, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 2,590
    Page views
  • 611
    Downloads
  • 21
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Ma Feilong et al.
    Research Article

    Intelligent thought is the product of efficient neural information processing, which is embedded in fine-grained, topographically-organized population responses and supported by fine-grained patterns of connectivity among cortical fields. Previous work on the neural basis of intelligence, however, has focused on coarse-grained features of brain anatomy and function, because cortical topographies are highly idiosyncratic at a finer scale, obscuring individual differences in fine-grained connectivity patterns. We used a computational algorithm, hyperalignment, to resolve these topographic idiosyncrasies, and found that predictions of general intelligence based on fine-grained (vertex-by-vertex) connectivity patterns were markedly stronger than predictions based on coarse-grained (region-by-region) patterns. Intelligence was best predicted by fine-grained connectivity in the default and frontoparietal cortical systems, both of which are associated with self-generated thought. Previous work overlooked fine-grained architecture because existing methods couldn't resolve idiosyncratic topographies, preventing investigation where the keys to the neural basis of intelligence are more likely to be found.

    1. Neuroscience
    Pratish Thakore et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Cerebral blood flow is dynamically regulated by neurovascular coupling to meet the dynamic metabolic demands of the brain. We hypothesized that TRPA1 channels in capillary endothelial cells are stimulated by neuronal activity and instigate a propagating retrograde signal that dilates upstream parenchymal arterioles to initiate functional hyperemia. We find that activation of TRPA1 in capillary beds and post-arteriole transitional segments with mural cell coverage initiates retrograde signals that dilate upstream arterioles. These signals exhibit a unique mode of biphasic propagation. Slow, short-range intercellular Ca2+ signals in the capillary network are converted to rapid electrical signals in transitional segments that propagate to and dilate upstream arterioles. We further demonstrate that TRPA1 is necessary for functional hyperemia and neurovascular coupling within the somatosensory cortex of mice in vivo. These data establish endothelial cell TRPA1 channels as neuronal activity sensors that initiate microvascular vasodilatory responses to redirect blood to regions of metabolic demand.